Simulation in Healthcare: Learning Theory, Curriculum Design, and Evaluation Unit Title

Simulation in Healthcare: Learning Theory, Curriculum Design, and Evaluation

Unit Code

2CP3D962

Unit Abbreviation

Simulation in Healthcare (SiH)

Level of Study 7

Credit Value

20

ECTS Value

Home Department

Health Professions

Home Faculty

Health, Psychology and Social Care

Unit

Suzanne Gough

10

Co-ordinator Key Words

Simulation / learning theory / curriculum design

Unit Description

Brief Summary

This unit is designed for clinicians, clinical educators and lecturers in academia involved in, or considering providing, simulation-based education within a number of contexts. It will provide participants with

the opportunity to critically evaluate the pedagogical principles underpinning the use of a wide range of simulation-based education available to support diagnostic, formative and summative assessment activities. The unit will encourage participants to adopt a design framework to critically justify and evaluate holistic formative and summative learning, teaching and assessment strategies, which is supported by the appropriate use of technology. The participants will reflect on these theories and apply them to the context of their own practice.

Indicative Content

 



Relevant theories, research and scholarly developments associated with the use of simulation-based education in healthcare. Innovation and good practice in: learning and teaching, debriefing, guided reflection, assessment, curriculum design, delivery and evaluation; informed by national, regional and institutional strategic priorities. Developing and evaluating existing educational resources including constructive alignment of learning outcomes, assessment/ debriefing/guided reflection.

Learning Outcomes

Unit Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of this unit students will be able to: 1. Critically evaluate the relevant theories, recent research and scholarly developments associated with the use of simulationbased education within healthcare. 2. Justify the current use of simulation-based education (specifying the equipment, environmental and psychological fidelity) applicable to their practice area. 3. Critically evaluate appropriate pedagogical principles of teaching, learning, de-briefing and assessment of simulation as applicable to their practice area. 4. Critically discuss potential/future simulation modifications that may enhance, using appropriate supporting literature.

Assessment

Summative Assessment

Element Type

Weighting

Learning

outcomes assessed

Employability and Sustainability Outcomes

1

Presentation

40%

1-3

2

Written assignment

60%

1-4

Outcomes

Apply skills of critical analysis to real world situations within a defined range of contexts.

1 and 2

Demonstrate a high degree of professionalism.

1 and 2

Express ideas effectively and communicate information appropriately and accurately using a range of media including ICT. Develop working relationships using teamwork and leadership skills, recognising and respecting different perspectives.

1 and 2

1 and 2

Manage their professional development reflecting on progress and taking appropriate action.

1 and 2

Find, evaluate, synthesise and use information from a variety of sources.

1 and 2

Articulate an awareness of the social and community contexts within their disciplinary field.

Description of each element of Assessment

Element of Assessment

1 and 2

Use systems and scenario thinking.

1 and 2

Engage with stakeholder/interdisciplinary perspectives.

1 and 2

Formative Assessment:

1. Produce a detailed framework, which incorporates simulationbased education (including learning outcomes, curriculum content and teaching learning, de-briefing and assessment strategies).

Demonstrate clear constructive alignment of relevant pedagogical and simulation-based education literature and theories. Or 2. Produce a detailed proforma for a new course/unit incorporating simulation-based education (including learning outcomes, curriculum content and teaching learning, de-briefing and assessment strategies). Demonstrate clear constructive alignment of relevant pedagogical and simulation-based education literature and theories. Or 3. Present to the group the theoretical relevancy of the type of simulation intervention within a unit/course that you are involved in delivering. This short (10-minute) presentation may feature either a video recording or interactive demonstration to illustrate your discussion. Individual feedback will be provided to all participants who participate in any of the formative feedback activities.

Summative Assessment: The summative assessment consists of two parts. Both parts must be completed to demonstrate achievement of the units learning outcomes.

Part 1: An oral presentation on the theoretical relevancy of the type of simulation intervention, educational practices, design characteristics and outcomes of a unit/course that you are involved in delivering. This (15-minute) presentation will require either a video recording or interactive demonstration to illustrate your discussion. It should also include a critical discussion of the evidence to support or refute your current practice. (40% of the unit marks). (Addressing Learning Outcomes 1-3).

Part 2: Participants will be required to produce a written assignment (2000-2500 words, 60% of the unit marks). This will consist of : A concise report to justify a unit/course, which incorporates simulation-based education, including a critical reflective evaluation of relevant theories, recent research and scholarly developments associated with the design and implementation of the participant’s chosen unit/course. (Addressing Learning

Outcomes 1-4).



The report may draw reference to the unit/course framework/proforma presented in your formative assessment. The framework (formative assessment option 1), proforma (formative assessment option 2) or interactive presentation slides/video (option 3) may be included as an appendix in the summative assessment to illustrate your achievement of the unit learning outcomes.

None specific Mandatory Learning & Teaching Requirements

Minimum Pass Mark Learning Activities Breakdown of Student Learning Activity

Type of Activity

%

Summative Assessment

25%

Directed Study

50%

Student-centred Learning

25%

Learning Resources

Books recommende d for purchase by students

None

Essential Reading/ Resources

Textbooks: Gould, J. (2009). Learning Theory and Classroom Practice in the lifelong learning sector. Exeter: Learning Matters.

Jeffries, PR. (Ed.). (2012). Simulation in nursing education: from conceptualization to evaluation, 2nd edition. New York: National League of Nursing.

Johns, C. (Ed.). (2010). Guided reflection: a narrative approach to advancing professional practice, 2nd edition. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

Electronic Resources: Butler, KW. (2009). Implementation of active learning pedagogy comparing low-fidelity simulation versus high-fidelity simulation in paediatric nursing education. Clinical Simulation In Nursing, Vol 5, e129136.

Harris, KR., Eccles, DW., Ward, P., and Whyte, J. (2013). A Theoretical Framework for Simulation in Nursing: Answering Schiavenato’s Call. Journal of Nursing Education, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 6-16.

Issenberg, BS., Mcgaghie, WC., Pertrusa, ER., Gordon, DL., and Scalese, RS. (2005). Features and uses of high-fidelity simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Medical Teacher, Vol. 27, pp10-28.

Kirlik, A. (2010). Brunswikian theory and method as a foundation for simulation-based research on clinical judgement. Simulation in Healthcare, Vol 5, No. 5, pp255-258.

Lapkin, S., Fernandez, R., Levett-Jones, T., Bellchambers, H. (2010). The effectiveness of using human patient simulation manikins in the teaching of clinical reasoning skills to undergraduate nursing students: a

systematic review. Joanna Briggs Institute Library of Systematic Reviews, JBL000287. Vol. 8, No. 16, pp661-694.

Neill, MA., and Wotton, K. (2011). High-fidelity simulation debriefing in nursing education: A literature review. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, Vol. 7, No. 5, pp e161–e168.

Policies and Reports: Department of Health, (2011). A framework for Technology Enhanced Learning. London: Crown Copyright.

Department of Health (2013) Delivering high quality, effective, compassionate care: Developing the right people with the right skills and the right values A mandate from the Government to Health Education England: April 2013 to March 2015. London: Crown Copyright.

Further Reading/ Resources

Textbooks:

Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed., Buckingham: SRHE/OUP.

Gillespie, H., Boulton, H., Hramiak, AJ., and Williamson, R. (2007). Practical handbooks Achieving OTS: Learning and Teaching with Virtual Learning Environments. Exeter: Learning Matters Ltd.

Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., and Luff, P. (2010). Video in qualitative research: analysing social interaction in everyday life. London: Sage.

Jeffries, P.R., (2007). Simulation in nursing education: from conceptualization to evaluation. New York: National League of Nursing.

Electronic Resources:

Decker, S., Sportsman, S., Puetz, L., and Billings, L. (2008). The evolution of simulation and its contribution to competency. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, Vol. 39, pp. 74-80.

Dieckmann, P., Friis, SM., Lippert, A., and Østergaard, D. (2009) The art and science of debriefing in simulation: Ideal and practice. Medical Teacher, Vol. 31, e287–e294.

Engum, S., and Jeffries, PR. (2012) Interdisciplinary collisions: Bringing healthcare professionals together. Collegian, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 145— 151.

Fero, L., Witsberger, C., Wesmiller, S., Zullo, T., and Hoffman, L. (2009). Critical thinking ability of new graduate and experienced nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 65, pp. 139-148.

Gaba, D. (2004). The future vision of simulation in health care. Quality Safety in Health Care, Vol. 13, Supplement. 1, ppi2-10.

Gough, S., Hellaby, M., Jones, N., and MacKinnon, R. (2012). A review of undergraduate interprofessional simulation-based education (IPSE). Collegian, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 153—170.

Hammick, M., Freeth, D., Koppel, I., Reeves, S. and Barr, H. (2007). 'A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9', Medical Teacher, Vol. 29 No. 8, pp735 – 751.

Jeffries, P.R. (2005). A framework for designing, implementing, and

evaluating simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing. Nursing Education Perspectives, Vol. 26, pp. 96-103.

Kardong-Edgren, S., Adamson, K. A., and Fitzgerald, C. (2010). A review of currently published evaluation instruments for human patient simulation. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, Vol. 6, e25-e35.

Rall, M., and Dieckmann, P. (2005). Simulation and patient safety: The use of simulation to enhance patient safety on a systems level. Current Anaesthesia and Critical care, Vol. 16, pp273-281.

Rosen, KR., (2008). The history of medical simulation. Journal of Critical Care, Vol. 23, pp.157–166.

Scerbo, MW., and Dawson, S. (2007) High Fidelity, High Performance? Simulation in Healthcare, Vol. 2, pp 224–230.

Shinnick, MA., Woo, M., Horwich, TB., and Steadman, R. (2011). Debriefing: The most important component in simulation? Clinical Simulation in Nursing, Vol 7, e105-111.

Waxman, K. T., and Telles, C. (2009). The use of Benner’s framework in high-fidelity simulation faculty development: The Bay Area Simulation Collaborative model. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, Vol. 5, No. 6, e231e235.

Wooley, NN., and Jarvis, Y. (2007). Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship: A model for teaching and learning clinical skills in a technology rich and authentic learning environment. Nurse Education Today, Vol 27, pp73-79.

Yuan, HB., Williams, BA., Fang, JB., and Ye, QH. (2012). A systematic review of selected evidence on improving knowledge and skills through

high-fidelity simulation. Nurse Education Today, Vol 32, No. 3, pp294-8.

Zhang, C., Thompson, S., and Miller, C. (2011). A review of Simulationbased Interprofessional Education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, Vol. 7, e.117-126.

Policies and Reports:

Barr, H., Freeth, D., Hammick, M., Koppel, I., and Reeves, S. (2000). Evaluations of interprofessional education. A United Kingdom Review for Health and Social Care, August 2000. The United Kingdom Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education with the British Educational Research Association.

Clinical Human Factors Group (CHFG). (2008) Memorandum by the Clinical Human Factors Group (CHFG) (PS 24) Patient Safety. Select Committee on Health: Written Evidence, September 2008, London: House of Commons.

Donaldson, L. (2009). Safer Medical Practice: Machines, Manikins and Polo mints. 150 years of the Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer: On the state of public health 2008. London: Department of Health.

National Health Service North West (NHS North West), (2010) Our NHS our Future: Supporting Simulation Education in the NHS in the North West. Manchester: National Health Service North West.

World Health Organization, (WHO), (2009). Patient Safety Curriculum Guide for Medical Schools, Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization, (WHO), (2011). Multiprofessional Patient Safety

Curriculum Guide, Geneva: WHO. Specialist ICTS Resources

None

Additional Requirements

None

Administration

JACS Code

B630

HESA Academic Cost Centre Date of Approval

28 October 2013

Date of Most Recent Consideration Unit External Examiner Unit Assessment Board

Annie Levis